[This originally appeared in *The Gentle Anarchist*, a zine published in Lawrence, Kansas in the mid 1980s] Notes toward a statement of principles TECHNOLOGY by boog highberger To be human is to use tools. To be antitechnology is thus at some level to be antihuman. Although sometimes I too, wonder if civilization is a good idea, this is mostly just tongue-in cheek, pseudo-intellectual cynicism. As long as we're living and working in the material world we need to accept the fact of human civilization with all its faults and come to grips with technology. Technology is not value-free. Although it would be too broad an assertion to say that technology determines social relations, the use of any technology is compatible with only a limited range of social relations. In a given society, the development of a more powerful technology than that currently existing does not inevitably lead to the adoption of the new technology and the displacement of the old. However once social conditions are favorable, the new technology will be adopted and it will alter its social environment to favor its own further development. The level of technological determinism is affected by the prevailing social and economic relations. In a traditional society with strong social cohesion there is a relatively low level of technological determinism. In a marketoriented society with a money economy there is a high level of technological determinism. Thus the Greeks understood the principles of the steam engine, but treated it as a curiosity and used it only to create magical effects in their temples. Watt's "invention" of the steam engine had a somewhat different effect on 18th century England. The development of the internal combustion engine has had an even greater impact. Mechanization of agriculture has all but eliminated the self-sufficient farm. The automobile has destroyed the city and the small community, replacing them with endless acres of suburbs filled with strangers alienated from their work, their environment. and each other. Television has effectively destroyed regional cultures. Modern communication and transportation systems are obviously incompatible with community. Like Wes Jackson says, "high energy destroys information". The response of Amish and Mennonite groups 20th century technology illustrates this point. The Amish and Mennonites are Christian sects characterized by strong communities and simple living. Most accept modern technologies but only up to seemingly arbitrary limits. Some groups, for instance, allow gasoline engines for powering stationary devices such as washing machines but not for vehicles. Some allow tractors but not cars. Some allow electricity in the barn but not in the house. These restrictions are reminiscent of religious taboos in some cultures, and seem to perform similar functions. These restrictions represent a refusal by these groups to submit to technological determination of their social relations. Amish and Mennonite community relations are far less mediated by money and commodities than those in the surrounding culture. They therefore retain enough community social control to set limits on their technology, and they have, for the most part, been able to maintain thriving communities while community has been eradicated all around them. Technology that is complex beyond the understanding of the people dependent on it is a threat to freedom. Such technology disenfranchises people by taking away from them the power to make the decisions that affect their lives and placing it in the hands of "experts". Autonomy and self-management demand a technology that is subservient to its users. If you depend on something, you need to know how to fix it. Technology that demands centralization and vast concentrations of capital similarly are incompatible with autonomy. Consensus and democratic decision-making work only in small groups. Mass organizations such as the modern factory demand hierarchy, coercion, and authority for their functioning. Many existing production technologies are capable of being organized in much smaller units than they are normally found today--from the beginning, centralized factory production was instituted not for economies of scale but to facilitate control of labor. However, some technologies. such as automobile production and nuclear power, by their nature demand big capital and centralized production and are thus inherently authoritarian. Environmentally destructive technologies are the social equivalent of spending one's capital. If you live only on interest you can do it forever, but if you use up your capital it's gone and there isn't any more. Dependence on such technology means sacrificing the well being of the planet and of future generations of humans for our own immediate material interests. Thus an anarchist society must be based on technology that is simple, decentralized, and environmentally sound. In practice, this means that we must change the way we live our lives to end our dependence on coercive & destructive technologies, and we must also organize resistance to such abusive technologies. Examples of such practical anarchy include: o buying more locally grown foods & organizing marketing co-ops for local organic producers oriding your bike instead of driving your car & fighting the new highway project o chopping your own firewood & fighting nuclear power plants oblowing up your TV and doing street theater The Luddites were right!